In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote:Here we go
In post 211, Writers Bloque wrote:I mean when you apply Occam's Razor as a way to dismiss having to reasonably defend something with context, then you can use it so you literally never have to explain anything. You were basically asserting our scum game is so weak we get noticed the first few pages or I was explaining something wrong -- wait... we'll get to that
Lol. Every case at this point is going to based on assuming somebody's scum game is so weak they get noticed in the first few pages? Like I'm sorry if you think I'm insulting your scum game or something here but...
What you're arguing and what we're talking about aren't exactly the same though
You said we couldn't convince you our posts aren't faked.
If we can't "convince" you our posts aren't faked when that's a basic tenet of scum play then we're literally incompetent. That's what your stance has to be. Which is fine you just have to make people believe that you believe it
In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote: Every case at this point is going to based on assuming somebody's scum game is so weak they get noticed in the first few pages? Like I'm sorry if you think I'm insulting your scum game or something here but...
Not really. Directly implies that scum have to play poorly for scum to be caught early game LOL
Sobolev Space wrote:
In post 211, Writers Bloque wrote:
Sobolev Space wrote:
I mean all of the above. It sounds like you threw out an explanation for your early suspicion of Mario to distance yourselves from others who were skeptical of him (i.e. Jason). Then when you were pressed on it you couldn't go in enough depth to make it look like it was something you really believed or had thought through.
Gee except you never said this though... let's revisit your initial post:
In post 183, Sobolev Space wrote: Something about their posts keep gut pinging me and their responses to my questions haven't been enough to convince me their content isn't faked.
This is a really ambiguous statement. At the time the implication to me here was you either have a vague read or a very specific one. Wait.. I guess we know what it is now, because once we started engaging, you literally now have several "reasons" to SR me in the post above. Like you picked "all of the above" multiple choice reasons to scumread us. If we were actually that scummy you wouldn't have made such a vague open to interpretation post here. It literally looks like you were trying to sort me (with the questions), this post here says that something is unclear, the correct procedure should be to interact with me to clarify what specifically is wrong with my posts. But it looks like you just doubled down as to not reverse your stance and put me as scum. I said before it reads like you were setting up to push me. Like you questioned me, I just answered the questions. It appears you had a problem with HOW I answered the questions, but rather than press that specifically, you just skip over that entire step and put me as scum. I don't feel like you actually sorted.
But like I did press you specifically on that. See for example posts
43,
45,
46,
47,
55,
61 as one interaction. When you're asked twice "when should mario have brought that up" and the only answer you give both times is "well not at the start" its time to stop pressing the point because we're getting nowhere. Like idk how long you think I need to keep asking you questions before I can just call you scum.
I told you "not at the start". It's what I said and what I meant. This isn't a test. It's valid. Literally my position is that's not how to enter optimally and you're trying to invalidate it.
Sobolev Space wrote:
You asking him questions and him clarifying them though is tangential to the part where you said your only problem is he had to start out with it. Like you can do one without the other. By distancing I meant that you were trying to not be lumped in with the others pushing him, not that you're partners with jason lol.
Who were the other people pushing him? Jason is the only one I recall.
I townread him? so if I were scum I wouldn't care about getting seen pushing MM4 with him
Sobolev Space wrote:
You asking him questions and him clarifying them though is tangential to the part where you said your only problem is he had to start out with it. Like you can do one without the other. By distancing I meant that you were trying to not be lumped in with the others pushing him, not that you're partners with jason lol.
In post 211, Writers Bloque wrote:2. "Then when you were pressed on it you couldn't go in enough depth to make it look like it was something you really believed or had thought through."
"Appear a certain way or you're scum!" is what I read here. Literally nothing specific that I can respond to or clarify in capacity. If a motive is unclear you question it.. why push?
Lol I did question it?
What do you mean. I gave you an answer and you were clearly expecting a different one or a different type of answer (or you want to present that image)
If you want answers that satisfy you ask better questions? If my answer doesn't satisfy you there's still a thought process to my ideas
I still don't know how "When would be a better time for him to bring it up?" Is a question that indicates anything.
If me saying "not at the start" isn't a good answer I clearly had a thought process behind it... but no we just have to be scum I guess
There are also questions you can ask to sort us that involve anything we haven't commented on yet. Your posts imply you exhausted the options to develop a read on us and I don't think that's true.
In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote:
In post 211, Writers Bloque wrote:I said that cause Gingham said "where your fascination with me comes from" like I was really tunneling her LMFAO. She said half my posts in the game at that point were about her, which isn't true. At that point in time 7/18 of my posts mentioned or replied to her. Not even tunnel. I was attempting to sort.
I don't see how trying to give your vote as little weight as possible helps you sort.
Votes have a lot of weight that's why they don't get just thrown around.
In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote:
No I don't think you thought Zulfy was scum in
64. I think you were threatening him with rope to try to get him to post. That's literally the same reason I kept my vote there. Although I didn't especially like his two posts they weren't enough to merit a serious scumread. Yet you turn around later and say that you're not okay with people's votes being on Zulfy.
That's
the contradiction.
So I threaten people I think are town with rope?
I wanted him to post jokingly
The simple issue is you've taken an interaction that's not AI because I know him and made it AI. Worse yet you believe it to be.... a GENUINE contradiction lmao. I think we're both aware that it's not
You said "I'm not moving my vote off of Zulfy until he gets replaced or does something"
then did exactly that
who contradicted what?
In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote:
In post 211, Writers Bloque wrote:Votes can be placed anytime. You can be lynched any time before the day ends. We weren't speedlynching anyone.
You're creating an issue where there is none.
I mean I don't see why town would keep their vote on somebody they TR when they have another legitimate scumread. What that looks like to me is scum trying to remain flexible. If I went after you hard you could switch your vote to me and 1v1 (as we're doing now) but if I decided to drop the issue you could just let it stay an offhand comment and move on with the game without being tied down to a strong scumread.
yawn more pressing about something that doesn't matter at all this is real exciting
In post 220, Sobolev Space wrote:
Re: the repeated claim that I went from "0 to 1000" on WB. Let me give y'all a brief chronology of my read on WB. Early game: WB posts some stuff I find weird. I question some of it (like the mario timing question or the Zulfy thing) but don't overtly call WB scum. During this time I did mention in both my neighborhoods that I find WB a little scummy (my neighbors can confirm this if necessary) but I'm trying to question them first to sort.
183 I mention I have a scumread on WB but am keeping my vote on Zulfy for now.
187 WB mentions their scumread on me but doesn't vote me.
190 I find their not voting me scummy enough to merit a vote and an overview of why I find them scummy. I question them on why they didn't vote me (spoiler alert: this question goes unanswered until I ask it again. But remember, according to WB I'm scum because I immediately start pressing them instead of questioning their motives).
192 WB poorly responds to my case marking the official start of this 1v1. Anyway thats my read progression. It should be pretty clear that I did not go from "0 to 1000" as WB is claiming.
This is absolutely correct.
0-900
